More than just logic tasks: New Approaches to understanding Reasoning

Abstract

Reasoning research has long been associated with paper and pencil
tasks in which peoples reasoning skills are judged against established
normative conventions (e.g., Logic). In this way researchers have tried to assess
the extent to which we can think rationally, and of course how we deviate from
normative conventions. The fruit flies of this domain have been the
Wason selection task (Wason, 1966), and Syllogistic reasoning tasks
(Johnson-Laird, 1984). The field has advanced in helping us to understanding the
influence of context on the kinds of inferences we tend to make, and we have
gained significant insights into the kinds of situations in which our biased
thinking is aligned with normative thinking and the situations in which it
conflicts with it.